RE- Is Pick X fair?

["TONY HUNTER" <TONY_HUNTER.OBGYN@quickmail.ucsf.edu>]

I WAS WONDERING WHAT THE WORLD SERIES WOULD LOOK LIKE IF THE TEAMS THAT WERE
ACTUALLY PLAYING IN THE WORLD SERIES GOT TO PICK THE UMPIRES....?


TIM THROWS OUT THE FOLLOWING NUMBERS:


Teams debating   Chance of getting a preferred judge 

S (small) v. S       20/150 * 20/150 = 400/22500

S v. B (big)           20/150 * 50/150 = 1000/22500 

B v. B                    50/150 * 50/150 = 2500/22500

TIM ASSUMPTIONS: 

We assume there are 150 judges at nationals, 'small schools' know 40 and
prefer 20, 'big schools' know 100 and prefer 50.

UNFORTUNATELY, TIM DOESN'T UNDERSTAND MATHEMATICS...IN ORDER FOR THESE NUMBERS
TO MEAN ANYTHING AT ALL, THE JUDGES WOULD HAVE TO BE PART OF A RANDOM
POPULATION, I.E. FOR ANY ONE JUDGE, THAT JUDGE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN EQUAL
PROBABILITY OF BEING IN THE TWENTY AS COMPARED TO BEING IN THE 50.  THIS IS
NOT THE CASE AT ALL.  THE DIFFERENCE HERE HAS TO DUE WITH REGIONAL
CONSTRAINTS.  IF TIM PROPOSES GETTING RID OF REGIONAL CONSTRAINTS, THEN THE
PRACTICAL IMPLICATION IS THAT SMALL SCHOOLS WHO DO NOT TRAVEL NATIONALLY WILL
PREFER JUDGES FROM THEIR REGION (WHO MOST LIKELY ALSO DO NOT TRAVEL
NATIONALLY).  AS A RESULT, THE LIKELIHOOD OF A MUTUALLY PREFERRED JUDGE IN THE
SMALL VS. SMALL CATEGORY IS ALMOST NIL UNLESS THE TEAMS ARE FROM THE SAME
REGION (THIS WOULD WORK OUT MUCH BETTER IF WE DO MY PICK 20 TEAMS SYSTEM...). 
ON THE OTHER HAND, IF TIM FAVORS KEEPING REGIONAL CONSTRAINTS IN PLACE, THE
NUMBER OF PREFERRED JUDGES FOR *SMALL* SCHOOLS WILL BE EVEN SMALLER (AND THEY
WILL BE *FORCED* TO PICK JUDGES THAT THEY DON'T PREFER TO ACHIEVE THEIR
MINIMUM 20).

IN CONTRAST, NATIONAL CIRCUIT TEAMS WILL MOST LIKELY BE DRAWING FROM THE
*SAME* POOL OF JUDGES THAT TRAVEL THE NATIONAL CIRCUIT, AND THIS POOL DOES NOT
RESEMBLE NOR DOES IT HAVE THE SAME CONSTRAINTS AS THE SMALL REGIONAL JUDGING
POOLS.  IN EFFECT, THE PROBABILITY FOR *BIG* SCHOOLS (AS TIM LIKES TO CALL
THEM) IN EQUATION BIG VS BIG, WILL BE EVEN HIGHER BECAUSE THERE WILL ALMOST
ASSUREDLY BE MORE THAN ONE OVERLAP BETWEEN NATIONAL CIRCUIT TEAMS.

THE POINT IS THAT THESE NUMBERS REPRESENT NOTHING!!  THE ASSUMPTION THAT TIM
DOESN'T MENTION IS THAT THE HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION ONLY APPLIES IF THE JUDGING
POPULATION IS RANDOMIZED (THAT'S WHAT PROBABILITY IS ALL ABOUT).  IN THIS
INSTANCE, DUE TO THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REGIONAL AND NATIONAL JUDGING
POOLS--THE 20'S HAVE AN INCREDIBLE LIKELIHOOD OF BEING DIFFERENT AND THE 50'S
HAVE AN INCREDIBLE LIKELIHOOD OF BEING SIMILAR (AT LEAST A HELL OF A LOT MORE
SIMILAR THAN THE 20'S ARE).  THE END RESULT IS THAT *BIG* SCHOOLS GET THEIR
PREFERRED JUDGES WHO JUDGE THEM ALL THE TIME ANYWAY, AND *SMALL* SCHOOLS DON'T
GET THEIR PREFERRED JUDGES.

TIM SAYS:

Currently there is no attempt to ensure the judge is mutually preferred so it
is more likely that a big school will get a judge they prefer.

MAYBE...BUT THERE'S A TRULY RANDOMIZED POSSIBILITY OF THAT, *AND* (EMPHASIS
HERE) THERE IS STILL A RANDOMIZED PROBABILITY THAT A *BIG* SCHOOL WILL GET A
JUDGE THAT THEY DON'T PREFER.  STRIKES GIVE YOU THE CHANCE TO AVOID CERTAIN
JUDGES, BUT DO NOT ALLOW *BIG* TEAMS TO INSULATE THEMSELVES FROM THE JUDGING
POOL.

TIM SAYS:

Pick X will only give the big schools one of their preferred judges if that
judge also appears on the list of the small schools. 

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE *SMALL* VS *BIG* MATCHUP. I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS POINT.
IF THERE ARE NO MATCHES BETWEEN TEAMS, THEN NO ONE ON EITHER LIST OF PREFERRED
JUDGES CAN JUDGE THAT ROUND?  ARE YOU GOING TO STICK WITH THAT POSITION? YOUR
LIST OF PREFERRED JUDGES BECOMES A STRIKE SHEET EVERY TIME A *BIG* SCHOOL HITS
A *SMALL* SCHOOL?  OR IF THE ONLY JUDGE THAT TWO TEAMS HAVE IN COMMON HAS
ALREADY BEEN ASSIGNED--THEN THERE MUST BE A MUTUALLY NON-PREFERRED JUDGE? HOW
IN THE HELL IS THIS GOOD FOR DEBATE? GARY HAS ALREADY MENTIONED SOME OF THE
PROBLEMS WITH THIS, BUT I WANT TO ADD A FEW THOUGHTS.

1: THIS WOULD STILL BE RANDOMLY ASSIGNED, GIVING *BIG* SCHOOLS THE SAME
ADVANTAGE THAT YOU STATED OCCURS ANYWAY.

2: DO YOU REALLY WANT TO GAMBLE THAT YOUR ENTIRE PREFERED LIST WOULD BE THROWN
OUT THE WINDOW WHEN NO MATCHES OCCUR.  THIS SEEMS LIKE A BIGGER RISK THAN
RANDOM JUDGING.

3: THIS SYSTEM FORCES THE STRATIFICATION OF DEBATE.  WHY WOULD ANY REGIONAL
SCHOOL PICK A JUDGE THAT TRAVELS THE NATIONAL CIRCUIT?  WHY WOULD ANY NATIONAL
CIRCUIT PICK A REGIONAL JUDGE THAT HASN'T HEARD THEM DEBATE?


TIM SAYS:

Pick X provides an advantage but the advantage is to the small schools.

WRONG...JUST PLAIN WRONG... 

TIM ASKS AND ANSWERS HIS OWN QUESTION:

So why would the 'big schools' want Pick X? Because
the system also increases their chances of getting a preferred judge.

......NO SHIT?


Even though it increases the chances for the small schools more than the big
schools any increase is a good increase.

WRONG...JUST PLAIN WRONG...

WHAT ABOUT THE FACT THAT NOT ALL JUDGES HAVE TO JUDGE THE SAME NUMBER OF
ROUNDS?  THAT SEEMS TO ME LIKE IT WOULD BE PROBLEMATIC TO A PICK 20 SYSTEM...?
HAS ANYONE MENTIONED THAT...?

WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO STRIKES?  DO WE GET TO STRIKE JUDGES IN ADDITION TO
PICKING 20...?  THAT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD ALSO SKEW THE NUMBERS A BIT...? HAS
ANYONE MENTIONED THAT...? HOW'S ABOUT WE GET AN UNLIMITED NUMBER OF STRIKES,
MAYBE THAT WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM TO EVERYONE'S SATISFACTION...?

THERE ARE REASONS FOR REGIONAL CONSTRAINTS...I THINK REGIONAL CONSTRAINTS ARE
APPROPRIATE.  THERE ARE REASONS FOR A LIMITED NUMBER OF STRIKES...I THINK
STRIKES ARE APPROPRIATE.  TOGETHER WITH RANDOM ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES, THE
SYSTEM IS FAIR AND EQUAL.

THERE IS NO, NO, NO, NO, NO REASON THAT A TEAM SHOULD BE ABLE TO PICK THERE
OWN JUDGES AT NATIONALS. AND BY THE WAY, I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT NATIONALS...I
THINK WHATEVER INDIVIDUAL TOURNAMENTS WANT TO DO IS FINE...SO GREG, EXPERIMENT
TO YOUR HEART'S CONTENT:-)

IT IS MY PERCEPTION THAT THE REAL REASON BEHIND A PICK 20 SYSTEM IS THAT IT
BIG REP TEAMS DON'T WANT TO GET "SCREWED" AT NATS BY PEOPLE THEY DON'T THINK
SHOULD EVEN BE ALLOWED TO JUDGE.  THAT'S THE PRICE OF A NATIONAL TOURNAMENT. 
A PICK 20 SYSTEM DOES MORE THAN INVITE NON-PREFERED MEMBERS TO LEAVE
DEBATE...IT POINTS A FINGER (I WON'T SAY WHICH ONE).


Tim Mahoney, Pace U.


EXPECTING TO BE ON MANY STRIKE SHEETS FOR VOICING MY OPINIONS.
EVEN THOUGH I WILL PROBABLY ONLY JUDGE FOUR ROUNDS...I'LL PROBABLY JUDGE
TRIPS...YOU MAY NOT WANT TO TAKE THAT CHANCE...:-)

TONY HUNTER
ASSOCIATED WITH MANY SCHOOLS IN
THE UNVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

---

• Prev by Date: RE- Pick at least 20.....
• Next by Date: Re: Pick at least 20.....
• Prev by thread: RE- Pick at least 20.....
• Next by thread: Is pick 20 fair...reply to Tony Hunter
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page